social protection
TRANSCRIPT
Social protection
Child Rights Spring 11
Risk and Vulnerability
Broad characteristics of childhood poverty and vulnerability:
• Multidimensionality – related to risks to children’s survival, development, protection and participation;
• Changes over the course of childhood – life cycle;• Relational nature – given the dependence of children
on the care, support and protection of adults are often compounded by the vulnerabilities and risks experienced by their caregivers. Impact of adversities and ‘misfortune’; (owing to their gender, ethnicity, spatial location, etc.);
Risk and Vulnerability cont.
• Discrimination – suffer by them and by their family / community
• Voicelessness – although marginalised groups often lack voice and opportunities for participation in society, voicelessness in childhood has a particular quality, owing to legal and cultural systems that reinforce their marginalisation
Why broad social protection systems
Conclusion from longitudinal studies
• Economic growth will not by itself solve the problem of childhood poverty and it can worsen inequality
• Living conditions experienced in very early life life cast a long shadow. Long-term implication of early damage
Why broad social protection systems
Conclusion from longitudinal studies cont.• Education need to go well beyond enrolment.
Increases in access say nothing about quality, attendance, latte drop-out.
• There is a real potential for social protection schemes to improve children’s well being. But design matters
Jo Boyden and others Young Lives Project, QEH, Oxford, UK
(Ethiopia, India (Andrhra Pradesh, Peru and Vietnam)
Defining Social protection“… enhance the social status and rights of the
marginalised; with the overall objective of reducing the economic and social vulnerability of poor, vulnerable and marginalised groups.” (Devereux & Sabates Wheeler, 2004)
• Protection• Prevention• Promotion• Distribution• Transformation
Defining Social protectionPolicy Instruments:• Social Transfers (cash or kind)• Social Insurance: health care for children,
pensions.• Social services: youth employment, alternative
care, support for excluded from education,…• Legislation and regulation: maternity/paternity
leave, antidiscrimination legislation, …
Policy Continuum(child protection)
Birth
registratio
n
Child la
bor
Targe
ting
User f
ees
Cash
trans
fers
Pover
ty re
ducti
on st
rate
gies
Budge
t allo
catio
n
Taxe
sTr
ade
Policy
Children: continuum of risk and protective factors
Family and personal assets
(Family cohesion, parental health, skills, jobs,Child health, ability, etc.)
Family and child support measures
A Universal family and child benefits and services
B Specialized family support services
C Substitute care services (adoption, foster care, residential, care)
Mountingrisks
Supportrequirement
AB
C
Low risk level
Medium risk level
High risk level
Absence of parental care
Half of key expected outcomes are closely related to social protection, e.g.
• Improved family and community care practices for child survival, growth and development
• Reduce gender and other disparities in education
• Community and government services to reduce marginalization of vulnerable children
• Quality family, community and government support for children orphaned or made vulnerable by HIV/AIDS
• Justice systems which ensure greater protection for children as victims, witnesses and offenders
Types of Social Protection• Protective:
– Social assistance: Cash transfers, universal benefit– Social services: Local services, shelters for women,
child foster systems
• Preventive:– Social Insurance: unemployment, health, …
• ‘Promotive’:– Microfinance, agricultural inputs/subsides
• Transformative:– Social justice legislation, affirmative action
‘Classic’ family support programmes and issues:• Programmes:
• child day-care services
• maternity and parental leaves
• family/child allowances
• child sick pay and disability supports
• social/orphan pensions
• Issues:
• equity, disparities (rich/poor, urban/rural, gender)
• targeting: universal, conditional, means-tested
• care for 0-2 year old children
• low uptake and/or benefit levels (employment record, employer/public attitudes, other factors)
• public-private mix
A few examples of social protection and insurance schemes
Priority area
Conditional cash transfers
Universal pensions
Minimum nutrition vouchers
Day care services
Child survival
If child immunized
Income for medicines
Increased nutrition
Hygiene training
Education If child sent to school
Income for school supplies
Increased school attendance
Developmental readiness
HIV/
AIDS
If child orphaned
Income for caring for orphans
Assist in caring for orphans
Protection If child not sent to work
Reduce marginalization
Child protection, Social protection, Social policy
Education
Health
Social
Welfare
Child Welfarese
rvice
s
serv
ices
benefits
benefits
Violence
Violence
preve
ntion
preve
ntion
Referral
Referral
Pre
vent
ion
Pre
vent
ion
Iden
tific
atio
n
Iden
tific
atio
n
Ref
erra
l
Ref
erra
l
Children in
Children in
the justice
the justice
system
system
Social PolicySocial Policy
Social protectionSocial protection
Child protectionChild protection
Cash transfers
• Birth grants
• Universal child allowances
• Conditional cash transfers
• Maternal or parental benefits
• Sick leaves, disability benefits
• Housing allowances
• Unemployment benefits
Conditional cash transfers
• What are they?
• How do they work?
• Why are they implemented?
Conditional cash transfers (ii)
• Targeted, not universal
• Conditionality may imply punishing the needy (punitive)
• Low impact/efficiency (e.g. high monitoring costs)
• Ethical issues (e.g. paternalistic/top down)
• Unintended consequences (e.g. discrimination, clientelism)
Methodological issues in assessing conditional cash transfers
• Reduce poverty or increase service access/utilization?• Reduce poverty now or in the future?
• Income or condition?• Condition or (previous) investment in services?• Even if they “work” in a carefully selected trial
experiment, would they work in a different context?
• Are we sure people did not want to satisfy condition?
Issues for debate: conceptual
• Universal vs only for marginal groups
• Stand alone vs part of macroeconomic, distributive justice, and development policies
• Mandatory vs voluntary contributions
• Formal vs informal
• Guaranteed minimum vs uncertain benefits
• State vs NGO delivery
Uruguay Program ‘Plan Ceibal’
• One personal PC by primary public school kid
• Universal
• Social tool, don’t intent to replace teachers
• Adding value to public school
• Closing the ICT gap
• Family impact
• http://vimeo.com/6640846
Dilemmas
• Cash or kind?
• Conditional or unconditional?
• Universal or targeted?
Cash Transfers Latin America and Caribbean
• Bolsa escola/Bolsa Familia: Brazil
• “Bridge” Program (Solidarity): Chile
• “Chile Crece Contigo”: Chile
• Health, nutrition and family allowances from social development Investment Fund: Costa Rica
• Oportunidades/Progresa: Mexico
• ‘Universal’ Child Benefit: Argentina
Cash Transfers Africa
• South Africa Social Grant: unconditional, target by household income, over 10 millions
• South Africa Child Support Grant: created 1998 children under 7 now expanded 14
• Malawi ‘Zomba’ to stay in school: girls poor families
• Zambia pilot target to household with children
Some results
• Cash transfers and low wages in public work programs may not be sufficient to lift people out of (income) poverty.
• No evidence of dependency. On the contrary, needed support and empowerment provided.
• The transfers need to be predictable, reliable, and regular.
• Conditionality should be handled carefully.
Targeting
• What is it?
• How does it work?
• Why is it implemented?
Target population
Programme
E mistake: excessive coverage (leakage)
F mistake: failure to reach target population
Targeting
Targeting has hidden costs Difficult to identify & reach the poor
F mistake, mostly women
Poor get bumped-off by not-so-poorE mistake, often women &
poorest
Administrative costs are highavoid F/E mistakes; oversight
Proving eligibility is costlydocuments, fees, fares, stigma, male-bias
Sustainability is underminedpoor’s voice weak to keep
scope/quality
How to avoid targeting when there are no sufficient resources?
Progressive realization
Allows to set criteria for priorities– Through time (long term plans)– At a point in time (short term budgets)
• Not an excuse to delay efforts
• GOAL: Cohesive/Inclusive societies
Cost recovery: caution
• User fees generate modest amounts.
• But they reduce access, esp. for poor.
• Exemption & waivers perform poorly.
• User fees deepen gender bias.
• Price signals do not always lead to optimal use.
International Child Benefit
• Who is responsible for ensuring that child policies are universal? Governments + trans-national corporations + international agencies
• Trans National Corporations’ increasing power: ‘corporate social responsibility’ children are involved in extreme forms of labour by TNC sub-contractors and subsidiaries
International Child Benefit
International Child Benefit
• Currency Transfer Tax: new resource for child benefit: a CTT of 0.2% would raise U$280 billons
Peter Townsend